standard way to require c++11?

[Chris Jones]

On 19/03/15 17:54, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Thursday March 19 2015 17:01:02 Chris Jones wrote:
>
>> Using gcc is a bad idea, this can lead to C++ runtime issues.
>
> On newer OS X versions where libc++ is the default (or only) C++ runtime.

No, its problematic on all OSX releases.

>
>> Which means newer systems use the compatible system clang compiler, and
>> older system use the macports clang compiler. I think this is the 'best
>> effort' solution. It doesn't work on OSX10.6 though, there we simply
>> given up support, as least with the root6 port.
>
> I don't see what's against using port:gcc4x on 10.6 or 10.7 as long as you don't need Apple-specific compiler extensions (probably including universal builds).

IFAIU, its still a problem as you will then be mixing the libstdc++ from 
macports with the system one. Not as bad as mixing libc++ with 
libstdc++, but still far from ideal and can lead to problems.

It's how I built relatively complex ports like kdevplatform and 
kdevelop, without any issues. Oh, and (favourite topic of mine), it's 
also a lot faster than the clang ports O:-)

Speed is not a concern for most, as they get most ports via the binary 
tarballs, and who cares how long it takes on the buildbots ;)

Speed also should never trump correctness, and again AFAIK, its more 
correct to use Macports clang in these cases, than macports GCC.

Chris

> I've never managed to use the blacklisting feature to force port to use g++-mp-4.{7,8,9}, though.
>
> R.
> _______________________________________________
> macports-dev mailing list
> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
> https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
>